Extreme FT rules and positions
- Thread starter Centercut
- Start date
I think what you don’t realize is that when you compete on a national or world level...everyone you are competing against has the proper equipment for the job. At the last FT Nats....everyone in the top 10 of wftf had capable equipment, so the match came down to who shot the best and managed his equipment and self the best....as it always does.
Many folks that compete are, in fact, competitive....but there are alway some that just show up and go through the motions for “fun”. You won’t find the guys that don’t put a lot into it in the top 10 at Nationals...at least not in wftf.
Many folks that compete are, in fact, competitive....but there are alway some that just show up and go through the motions for “fun”. You won’t find the guys that don’t put a lot into it in the top 10 at Nationals...at least not in wftf.
Upvote 0
So let me understand all this whining is because EVERYONE has to shoot with the same support equipment. ROFLMAO
Upvote 0
The pretzel is actually called the deadman or South African style. It’s used by many every year at the Worlds. It’s legal and goes uncontested as so every year as it has for a very long time. You may not like it, but that doesn’t make it bending the rules.
Mike
Mike
Upvote 0
I fully realize that the top shooters of any class of regular ft at any level have "capable" (read expensive) equipment.
That's what we're trying to get away from.
And it sounds like we fully agree that a competitive shooter needs to put a lot into it in order to stay competitive. How cool of a concept is it though, that someone less financially blessed could be competitive through good ole fashioned hard work and dedication.
Upvote 0
I think what you don't fully realize is that I too, would prefer to be able to use my regular field target position in Extreme. I feel, just as you do, that it would give me an advantage to be able to sit on my bumbag and strap myself in with my harness.
I am, however, willing to spend some time practicing in the only position allowed in Extreme, knowing full well that every other competitor will also be shooting from that same position and they also have the free agency to practice, or not.
Fairness is the word that comes to mind after that last paragraph.
Upvote 0
Right? How can this possibly be a bad thing? EAFT is loosely based on Hunter Class FT. Not Open, not WFTF, not Freestyle. I’m confused over why this seems to be so hard to understand? Ben even provides the bucket or step stool and “sticks” if you don’t have your own. All you need to do is show up with your gun. Easy day...
I even think the seated pretzel would be allowed like Scott S shot at the 2020 CA State FT to come in 4th in Hunter Class. He used a bucket and sticks, both feet on the ground, and butt at least 8 inches off the ground. As long as the gun didn’t have attachments so it would sit higher in his lap it would be good to go..
Upvote 0
Well...good luck, sir.
You’ll probably get a kick out of this. I would probably give it a try sometime...but I’m not going to buy a scope and a set of sticks just to shoot it once or twice. Gave my sticks to a friends son, and only have my 40x FT Leupold and a wonky 36x Sightron.
Mike
You’ll probably get a kick out of this. I would probably give it a try sometime...but I’m not going to buy a scope and a set of sticks just to shoot it once or twice. Gave my sticks to a friends son, and only have my 40x FT Leupold and a wonky 36x Sightron.
Mike
Upvote 0
Is this what you are worried about?:
https://www.google.com/images?q=airgun+field+target+deadman+position
Centercut seems to be saying that bucket and sticks should be a requirement and all that is allowed in EFT because that's what works best (most advantageous, most popular, most winning) (in Hunter Field Target at least). While you seem to be saying that bucket seat and sticks should be required and the only thing allowed in EFT because other supported positions would be an unfair advantage over buckets and sticks.
I shoot regular FT with a light weight bullpup, and that works well from a tight position even without sticks. I feel that the sticks will be an advantage for me when shooting my heavy benchrest gun in EFT. So that's what I'll be doing when/if I get the opportunity to do so. So no worries, right?
Upvote 0
What we're both saying is that bucket and sticks is the only allowed position in Extreme Field Target.
I'm also simply asking that we honor those rules regarding allowed position instead of interpreting them in various ways to gain an advantage.
If your plan is to place your behind on a bucket or stool that is at least 8 inches off the ground, with your feet on the ground, and your gun resting on sticks, then, yes, no worries (because that is how everyone else will be shooting).
Gotta say, I'm real curious to see how that wording can be manipulated.
Upvote 0
Mike, we would love to have you come down and shoot. I'm telling you man, LOTS of fun.
Pile of shooting sticks at the prematch meetings, intended to be borrowed.
I'm not sure how you pull off the offhand shots at 40x. I gotta turn it down in regular ft. I've been using a fixed 20x SWFA for Extreme and wish it could be turned down for the forced position shots.
And yes, I see the irony in you not having a 25x or less scope after all this talk of inclusivity.
Upvote 0
Scott,
Centercut didn’t say bucket and sticks were the most stable position, Mike N did. See below: Centercut would prefer prone...
————————————————-
thomasair
Long ago I set up a sideshot camera and used a piece of large graph paper about 10m away with an aim point. I recorded 30 second sessions using all sorts of positions and shooting aids such as sticks, harnesses, coats, slings, etc. The shooting sticks produced the least movement on the target after learning how to get in the best position to utilize them. I think in total It took an afternoon of experimentation to find that stability
————————————————-
Centercut also didn’t say that bucket and sticks “should be” a requirement. He said they “are” a requirement for EAFT.
And yes, no worries...
Centercut didn’t say bucket and sticks were the most stable position, Mike N did. See below: Centercut would prefer prone...
————————————————-
thomasair
Long ago I set up a sideshot camera and used a piece of large graph paper about 10m away with an aim point. I recorded 30 second sessions using all sorts of positions and shooting aids such as sticks, harnesses, coats, slings, etc. The shooting sticks produced the least movement on the target after learning how to get in the best position to utilize them. I think in total It took an afternoon of experimentation to find that stability
————————————————-
Centercut also didn’t say that bucket and sticks “should be” a requirement. He said they “are” a requirement for EAFT.
And yes, no worries...
Upvote 0
Sorry to keep whining (or, as some call it, "having an adult conversation) but here are more words vomited from my tortured soul.
1. The barrier to entry in regular FT isn't the gun. It's the scope. There are tons of guns under $500 that can accurately shoot 1 1/2 kill zones at 55 yards. However, you have to spend a bunch of money to know if the target is 48 yards or 55 yards. By removing the range finding aspect and limiting scopes to 25x, you have removed the scope as a barrier to entry.
2. By extending the range to 100 yards, the gun is now the barrier to entry. Looking at the list of guns from the last two shoots, the only sub-$1,000 gun is a Marauder, with the Redwolfs and FXs being pretty much standard. So the goal to make it all about shooting skill assumes that the shooters are using $2,000+ guns. Can someone be competitive with a $300 Avenger? I don't know, but I just ordered one so I guess we'll find out. My point is that the equipment race hasn't been removed, it's been moved from the scope to the gun.
3. I knew the day would come when someone would come along and add some pepper to FT, and I think it's great. However, in my mind the new and improved American Field Target looked more like Precision Rifle Shooting: lots of prone mats and attached bipods, with bearded, steely-eyed men and women gazing into the distance with a 1000 yard stare. I didn't think it would take the most embarrassing part of Field Target (a bunch of old farts sitting on orange Home Depot buckets) and make that the game.
Here is my current rules scorecard (from a guy who has never shot this):
Remove range estimation - A+++
Eliminate equipment race - D-
Only 1 class - A+
Make all shots forced position with props - C
I had another point, but I forgot it and I have to go to work. So, thanks again for the hard work and I'll check in later.
1. The barrier to entry in regular FT isn't the gun. It's the scope. There are tons of guns under $500 that can accurately shoot 1 1/2 kill zones at 55 yards. However, you have to spend a bunch of money to know if the target is 48 yards or 55 yards. By removing the range finding aspect and limiting scopes to 25x, you have removed the scope as a barrier to entry.
2. By extending the range to 100 yards, the gun is now the barrier to entry. Looking at the list of guns from the last two shoots, the only sub-$1,000 gun is a Marauder, with the Redwolfs and FXs being pretty much standard. So the goal to make it all about shooting skill assumes that the shooters are using $2,000+ guns. Can someone be competitive with a $300 Avenger? I don't know, but I just ordered one so I guess we'll find out. My point is that the equipment race hasn't been removed, it's been moved from the scope to the gun.
3. I knew the day would come when someone would come along and add some pepper to FT, and I think it's great. However, in my mind the new and improved American Field Target looked more like Precision Rifle Shooting: lots of prone mats and attached bipods, with bearded, steely-eyed men and women gazing into the distance with a 1000 yard stare. I didn't think it would take the most embarrassing part of Field Target (a bunch of old farts sitting on orange Home Depot buckets) and make that the game.
Here is my current rules scorecard (from a guy who has never shot this):
Remove range estimation - A+++
Eliminate equipment race - D-
Only 1 class - A+
Make all shots forced position with props - C
I had another point, but I forgot it and I have to go to work. So, thanks again for the hard work and I'll check in later.
Upvote 0
That Marauder was only six shots down from the winner (talking pellet class here).
Yes, a budget friendly gun can win.
Get that Avenger rocking in the 40-50fpe range with a 0.05ish bc pellet and a consistent spread and, finally, and probably the biggest thing, figure out what it does in the wind and get stable from a bucket and sticks by shooting it a bunch, and you can be competitive.
Yes, a budget friendly gun can win.
Get that Avenger rocking in the 40-50fpe range with a 0.05ish bc pellet and a consistent spread and, finally, and probably the biggest thing, figure out what it does in the wind and get stable from a bucket and sticks by shooting it a bunch, and you can be competitive.
Upvote 0
Here's what "could" happen if say everyone were required to shoot a sub $1000 mass produced rifle. I can certainly see this happening, can't you? Speaking in general here to everyone.
#1 = If mods were allowed to the rifle, the guys with the mods would be more likely in most cases to have a superior rifle, in one or more ways, thereby gaining a slight advantage.
#2 = If guys were not allowed to do any mods then the ones that could afford it would order a dozen rifles and test them all thereby finding the best shooter out of all of them, then selling the rest. Thereby gaining a slight advantage.
#3 = People would find out through trial and error which of the less expensive rifles performed the best on average and most would gravitate to that brand rifle. Thereby gaining a slight advantage.
#4 = The manufacturers would possibly strive to actually make a solid inexpensive rifle, using 2 action screws, factory bedding, and a sturdy barrel attachment system + match barrel, with good ergos and trigger,(with like
3 or 4 regs in it
/JK, because you need a reg, for a reg, for a reg....) Like many cheap firearms have, minus the regs of course. Once again people with these could gain an advantage.
There's no way I can think of to make things perfectly square across the board even if less expensive rifles were required, right oh???
Scopes = Same thing would happen if a price cap happened with scopes. People would find the scopes that make it easier to "see" mirage. And actually some eyes see mirage easier than others, Wish mine did??!! At least if a scope doesn't track well holdovers can be used. Even so there's going to be newbs coming out with a 3-9x40 with duplex reticles once in a while that have to learn the hard way that this isn't the best choice a person could make to use in a EAFT match.
Rules = this might not have been discussed publicly yet but it could be asked of Ben if one wanted to come and shoot EAFT, can this person shoot "any way" he wants to but NOT for score, as long as the rifle is sub 100 fpe??? That way a person can do what they have in mind for self gratification and in the way they are used to doing. So we see someone shooting other than stated in the rules we know they are there only for fun and not being awarded by prize or recognition, well other than maybe a good ole fashioned Tar and Feathering, lol.
So in the end I doubt a nice shooting inexpensive gun would be much different than an expensive gun which theoretically should shoot at least as well. How many here have had expensive rifles not shoot so well raise their hand, I'm raising mine.
You guys better look out once I get my ass formed to my bucket, that's going to be one steady ass position, lol.
#1 = If mods were allowed to the rifle, the guys with the mods would be more likely in most cases to have a superior rifle, in one or more ways, thereby gaining a slight advantage.
#2 = If guys were not allowed to do any mods then the ones that could afford it would order a dozen rifles and test them all thereby finding the best shooter out of all of them, then selling the rest. Thereby gaining a slight advantage.
#3 = People would find out through trial and error which of the less expensive rifles performed the best on average and most would gravitate to that brand rifle. Thereby gaining a slight advantage.
#4 = The manufacturers would possibly strive to actually make a solid inexpensive rifle, using 2 action screws, factory bedding, and a sturdy barrel attachment system + match barrel, with good ergos and trigger,(with like
3 or 4 regs in it/JK, because you need a reg, for a reg, for a reg....) Like many cheap firearms have, minus the regs of course. Once again people with these could gain an advantage.There's no way I can think of to make things perfectly square across the board even if less expensive rifles were required, right oh???
Scopes = Same thing would happen if a price cap happened with scopes. People would find the scopes that make it easier to "see" mirage. And actually some eyes see mirage easier than others, Wish mine did??!! At least if a scope doesn't track well holdovers can be used. Even so there's going to be newbs coming out with a 3-9x40 with duplex reticles once in a while that have to learn the hard way that this isn't the best choice a person could make to use in a EAFT match.
Rules = this might not have been discussed publicly yet but it could be asked of Ben if one wanted to come and shoot EAFT, can this person shoot "any way" he wants to but NOT for score, as long as the rifle is sub 100 fpe??? That way a person can do what they have in mind for self gratification and in the way they are used to doing. So we see someone shooting other than stated in the rules we know they are there only for fun and not being awarded by prize or recognition, well other than maybe a good ole fashioned Tar and Feathering, lol.
So in the end I doubt a nice shooting inexpensive gun would be much different than an expensive gun which theoretically should shoot at least as well. How many here have had expensive rifles not shoot so well raise their hand, I'm raising mine.
You guys better look out once I get my ass formed to my bucket, that's going to be one steady ass position, lol.
Upvote 0
Perhaps make a freestyle class where anything goes. The only thing is like Steve said your score shouldn't count toward prizes. That might be worth submitting for a SHOOTERS vote. The thing that I feel we need to keep in mind is anytime you add money to whatever discipline you’re talking about then cheating becomes very high on the probability list and in order to keep this fair and equal and inclusive we need to keep the rules a way that people can participate but they cannot manipulate. IMO
Upvote 0
That's a good idea, and I'd vote for it... The "Freestyle" score of course doesn't go towards any course records, prize money, bragging rights, etc,, its just for the halibut, or fun of it... Still gotta cough up the entry fee...
Steve, good points. I'm waiting to see the Montgomery Ass Molded Seat (MAMS) next time we shoot!!!
Perhaps you can patent the MAMS for EAFT and FT use...Mike
Upvote 0
Cole, I suppose what is viewed as a competitive score and what is not is very subjective.
Someone that shoots a 20 compared to a 26 might feel like that is competitive as it’s only 6 points down from the leader ... but put into perspective that’s 25ish percent lower. Compare that to a 2 day GP match of 120 shots where the winner shot 115 and someone else shot 25% less and you have a 86. I don’t know who might call a near 30 point disparity competitive. I guess it’s all in how you want to view it.
We will see as time plays this all out.
I think you will have to make all the shots past the reasonably precision level of a pellet for the sloppier guns to not be too disadvantaged....like all 75 plus yards. Past 75 yards...the line between a great gun and a mediocre gun is very vague when using pellets.
It is a neat experiment.
Mike
Someone that shoots a 20 compared to a 26 might feel like that is competitive as it’s only 6 points down from the leader ... but put into perspective that’s 25ish percent lower. Compare that to a 2 day GP match of 120 shots where the winner shot 115 and someone else shot 25% less and you have a 86. I don’t know who might call a near 30 point disparity competitive. I guess it’s all in how you want to view it.
We will see as time plays this all out.
I think you will have to make all the shots past the reasonably precision level of a pellet for the sloppier guns to not be too disadvantaged....like all 75 plus yards. Past 75 yards...the line between a great gun and a mediocre gun is very vague when using pellets.
It is a neat experiment.
Mike
Upvote 0
Yes, it's all relative. In regular field target where 1st and second is often a 100% and one miss, then yes, 6 more misses puts a guy down there a ways. But when the best (pellet) score is a 26/40 ......that 20/40 doesn't look so bad.
Especially when you put it into the context of the fact that that Marauder beat two Red Wolfs, a Wolverine, a Prophet, an Impact, and a Crown. I think the cheapest of those is bout 3 times the cost of the Marauder and a couple are 4 or more times the cost of the Marauder.
Upvote 0
"Question 2 (for the Caveman): Am I going to have to go to Home Dee-Pot and buy a bucket, or are you going to let me sit on my cheatin' cushion at your match?"
I'm gonna work on my beer-belly while enjoying this knock-down drag-out for a while before deciding on rules for my TEXtreme Field Target Match, SC. However bum-bags will be allowed to shoot TFT; probably just a matter of whether or not I have one (BB-inclusive) class, or two.
Regardless, I'll have extra buckets available (for rent, of course). In God we trust; all others PAY CASH.
I'm gonna work on my beer-belly while enjoying this knock-down drag-out for a while before deciding on rules for my TEXtreme Field Target Match, SC. However bum-bags will be allowed to shoot TFT; probably just a matter of whether or not I have one (BB-inclusive) class, or two.
Regardless, I'll have extra buckets available (for rent, of course). In God we trust; all others PAY CASH.
Upvote 0